Tag: Hillary Clinton

Given my frequent advocacy for freedom, dignity, and basic human rights; and given my well documented disdain for our current president, I am frequently accused of being a liberal, or some variant thereof: “socialist”, “elitist”, “democrat”, or my favorite “libtard”. This is often accompanied by a disdain for my constant desire for and reliance on government handouts.

In the interest of full disclosure, since it comes up so often, I thought I should document my entire reliance on government handouts. One, I once received a partial academic scholarship to a public university. Two, I once received a single unemployment check, for $258. (To be fair, as a business owner I have paid far more than that into the state’s unemployment insurance.)

So now that you know how heavily I’ve been sucking on the public teat, maybe it’s time I provided some background, laid out the thought processes behind my positions, and let you decide for yourself whether or not I am a liberal. For what it’s worth, I am willing to fully accept you judgement on this, as I have no intention of changing my positions just to fit a label.

In simplest terms, I view myself as fiscally conservative, and socially liberal.

Let me address the second one first, because (gasp) I did use the “L” word there. To be more specific, I believe in freedom. I believe in the Constitution. It is the document that ensures that freedom. It is my Bible. I believe people should have the freedom to live their lives any way they like, so long as it does not harm others. This includes who they love, and who and how they worship, and what they eat, drink, or smoke. No one, especially not the government, should ever tell you how to love, how to believe, or what to do.

Now, based on that, I would think the proper term would be “libertarian” (small “l”), but if believing in freedom makes me a liberal, so be it.

Further, I believe discrimination is wrong. Fundamentally wrong. I do not believe “religious freedom” include the right to discriminate against others. I remember the 70’s, when religious folk used their religion to justify discrimination against interracial couples, the same way they do today against same-sex couples. It was wrong then, it is wrong now. It is wrong. I will fight you on this.

On the economic side of things, I believe government should limit it’s role to only those things which are best done by government. And I believe that to be a fairly short list, but it does include a social “safety net” for those who truly need it.

I believe the best thing for consumers, producers, and the nation as a whole, is competition. The best way to achieve competition is to start with a free market. However, the end result of an unregulated free market is monopoly, and monopolies are by nature anti-competitive. To expand, I believe government has three basic responsibilities regarding business, there are three basic things that business cannot or will not do for itself.

One is maintain a competitive environment, the mythical “level playing field”. This means anti-trust regulation, and enforcement. This means banning price-fixing, dumping, and other anti-competitive practices. There should be as little interference as possible, but like any competition, to ensure some basic fairness there have to be some basic rules.

The second thing government must do is ensure the health and safety of a companies employees, customers, and neighbors. There is no profit incentive to do this, an unregulated free market generates horrible working conditions, occasionally dangerous products, and all manner of environmental abuse and pollution. Again there should be as little interference as possible, but it is government’s responsibility to protect the public trust, and that includes our water, our air, and our health and well being.

The third thing government should do for business, is provide an environment in which business can thrive. Conservatives often only read that as tax incentives or reductions, but it goes far beyond that. It is infrastructure. It is roads and rail and ports. It is public transportation. It is science and information. It is support for research and development. It is support for day care, and health care, and senior care, and other employee needs. Companies are built on people. We cannot help one at the expense of the other. We have to help both together.

Okay, now that we’ve laid that background, here’s the fun part. How does a fiscally conservative, socially liberal vote?

I am unashamedly a Reaganite. I don’t agree with everything he did, but I do agree with most of it. Yes, he created a massive budget deficit, but in doing so he won the Cold War, the single biggest and most important geopolitical event in my lifetime. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc was a direct result of the policies he set in place during his presidency.

Secondly, he knew how to get things done. He was not afraid to work with the other party to achieve something, a quality severely lacking today, and has been for the last decade.

Back in those days I did not vote. If I had, it would have been for Reagan, but he had more than enough popular support, and didn’t really need my help. To this day, his remains the one and only campaign rally I have ever attended.

George Bush (41) was the natural successor to Reagan. Everyone thought of him as Reagan Jr, despite the obvious fact that Bush, like all vice presidents at the time, was chosen specifically because he held views opposite those of Reagan, in the ridiculous attempt to “balance the ticket”. Still, Dukakis wasn’t much of a choice either. Of the two, I preferred Bush, but was perfectly content to go along with the crowd on this one. I did not vote.

George Bush found the end of his first term in a recession (mild by today’s standards, but a big deal then), and he chose to ignore it. His position was to do nothing and let it sort itself out, which of course it would have, but people wanted action, which meant…

Bill Clinton was elected on four words: “It’s the economy, stupid.” I had no doubt at the time that this would get him elected. Like Bush, I thought the economy would be fine if left alone, but if this conservative southern Democrat wanted to take a shot at fixing it, I was fine with that too. I continued to not vote.

Bill Clinton was the beneficiary of a budget surplus, the so called “peace dividend”. That was the direct result of the end of the Cold War, and I contend to this day that that was the direct result of the policies of the Reagan administration.

Still, he managed it well, so when he ran for re-election against the very stiff, very stodgy, and overall unappealing Bob Dole, had I been voting, I probably would have voted for Clinton. Maybe. It was only later that we found out Bob Dole had a sense of humor, and was most likely an actual human being. Oh well.

Lastly on Clinton, I don’t care who he played “hide the cigar” with. That’s a matter between him and Hillary, has no bearing on his ability to run the country, and quite frankly is none of our damn business. His biggest mistake there, was lying about it publicly. But honestly, of all the things a president could lie about, in today’s world this one looks downright quaint.

Bush vs. Gore. Honestly did not care. Two equally incompetent losers. Take your pick. I did not vote. Bush became president, but in more ways than one, there was no winner.

Then 9/11 happened. That changed everything.

In 2004, for the first time, I voted. Having politicians I like and disliked in both parties, and never being a blind supporter of any group, I registered as an independent. No party affiliation. I am still registered that way today, but…

I voted for George W Bush. I felt his response in Afghanistan was correct, and mythical WMD’s aside, I understood, and largely agreed with, his motivations for invading Iraq. I still believe both of those decisions were correct, however I was deeply disappointed by his administration’s lack of planning and attention in managing both of those countries after initial fighting was done.

There is probably nothing more symbolic of the Bush (43) presidency than the “Mission Accomplished” banner. It was clearly not accomplished, and the last thing we needed as a nation was a long, drawn out occupation. Sun-Tzu should be required reading for all presidential candidates. Once a year.

In retrospect, I was disappointed with Bush (43), but I’m not sure John Kerry would have been much better. I will reluctantly stand by my “don’t change horses in mid-stream” position.

I did not vote for Barack Obama. I wanted to, I really really did. But I just didn’t feel he had the necessary experience and qualifications to be President.

Let me just pause here and emphasize something. Back in those days, that was a thing. We wanted experience. We wanted expertise. We wanted substance. We wouldn’t let just any half-bit celebrity in a bad suit become president. My how the world has changed.

Also, I had liked McCain. This despite my disappointment in his pandering to the far right during his campaign, and his serious lack of judgement, of lack of attention to detail, in select crazy Alaska woman as his running mate. In the end, I thought experience mattered, and voted for McCain. It was largely symbolic, I had little doubt Obama would win. And given the historic significance of that, I was okay with it.

Obama didn’t do a great job, but he didn’t do a bad job either. Given the nature of the opposition, it’s a wonder he was able to do anything at all. There is something to be said for a president not doing a bad job. Yes, the economy was recovering slowly under his leadership, but at least he wasn’t making it worse. And if you don’t think a president can take a bad economy and make it much worse, you don’t remember Jimmy Carter.

Obama’s not bad job of things, combined with the fact that Mitt Romney was an out-of-touch hyper-elitist rich guy who wore magic underwear, meant I didn’t much care who won the next election. If only Romney had known that an elitist could be elected if he just pretended to be a down-to-earth racist, things might have been different, but it looked pretty certain, especially after his “47 percent” comment, that Obama would win again.

I thought this might be the time for a third party to make a significant showing, given the general dissatisfaction with both candidates. I voted for Gary Johnson, hoping this would be the year they made a blip on the map. My optimism was reward by this: Gary Johnson got 1% of the popular vote.

I will not make that mistake again.

That brings us to the 2016 election. First, let’s talk Democrats. There were really only two near-viable candidates. I did not think Bernie Sanders had much of a chance. And to be honest, I thought he was a bit too progressive. Democratic socialism works very well in Europe (surprise, they still have their freedom, they’re not commies), but we’re just not ready for that here yet. Baby steps.

I did not like Hillary Clinton. I do not think she is the spawn of Satan, but, and I cannot emphasize this enough, I did not like Hillary Clinton. After Bill’s second term, when she moved to New York so she could run for the Senate, that told me everything I needed to know about her. She was an opportunist who cared far more about her career that she did about representing the people she was elected to represent. I still stand by that assessment.

There were 17 candidates on the Republican side. Seventeen. I was fully prepared to support 16 of them. Even the crazy ones, like Carson, or the spineless ones, like Rubio, or the downright loathsome ones, like Cruz. Personally, I liked Kasich, but I really thought this would be Jeb Bush’s year. I was okay with that. Literally, and I’ve said this before, literally any other candidate but Trump. Any. Other. Candidate.

I follow the comings and goings of business people. Always have. I watch their interviews, I read their books, I try to study what makes them successful. I knew before he announced exactly what Trump was. And while I still believe it might be useful one day to have a real businessman in the White House, I firmly believe Trump is not the kind of “businessman” you want anywhere near public service.

So, my absolute nightmare scenario was Clinton vs Trump. I never imagined it would happen.

It happened. And as much as I dislike Hillary, I reject the notion that “they’re the same”. They are not. They are demonstrably not the same. Intelligence, experience, and expertise still have to count for something. As do motivation. I did not trust Clinton’s motivation, but I trusted Trump’s far less. And of the two, only one had the experience to be president. So yes, I voted, for the first time in my life, for a Democrat for president. I stand by that decision.

We are seeing today what happens when we elect inexperience. And I’m not talking about Obama-level inexperience, we survived that relatively unscathed. I’m talking legit, I-have-no-freaking-clue-what-I’m-doing inexperience. So far the worst result has been the unraveling of decades of progress, and a general embarrassment on a global scale, but if that’s the worst that happens I will consider his “presidency” a success.

I am interested to see what becomes of the Republican party. I am deeply disappointed in it’s leadership, and their embrace of Trump, who is neither fiscally nor socially conservative. Not even a little. They have place party, not only above country, but above their own stated principles. This to me seems insane. It is my opinion that the party cannot survive in it’s current state, it must either change or split. As it is today, if it doesn’t change, I may never vote Republican again.

I am no fan of the Democratic party either, but I am a fan of sanity. And I will continue to value experience and expertise above change only for the sake of change.

Okay, so it’s come to light recently that Bob Dole was behind the Trump-Taiwan call. Yes, the same Bob Dole that ran for president and lost to Bill Clinton. That same Bob Dole just guided Trump into torpedoing nearly 40 years of US-Chinese relations. We must ask, why?

Now granted, Bob Dole is working for a law firm, which was reportedly paid $140,000 to make that call happen, and we all know the only difference between lawyers and prostitutes is, well, there are some things a prostitute will not do for money. But…

I wonder if there’s more to it than that. Is Donald Trump actually Bob Dole’s ultimate payback to the Clinton’s and/or the American people for refusing him the presidency? Is Bob Dole an evil mastermind, slowly and quietly plotting his revenge since 1996?

Let’s look at the evidence. Fortunately we now live in a post-rational fact-free world, so manufacturing evidence is much easier than it used to be.

First, if you remember, Bob Dole had this weird tendency to always refer to him self in the third person, as in “You’re always going ‘Bob Dole does this’ and ‘Bob Dole does that.’ That’s simply not something Bob Dole does!” (actual real quote) And we all know from movies and television that people who refer to themselves in the third person are mentally unstable, right?

And we all know that the whole Trump running for president thing started at the 2011 White House Correspondents Dinner, where Trump was publicly humiliated by Barack Obama. Did Bob Dole invite Trump to that dinner? I can’t prove that he did, but more importantly, I can’t prove that he didn’t either.

We also know that, unlike many Republicans, Bob Dole supported Trump early and often, stating that he was supporting Trump because he couldn’t vote for George Washington (another actual real quote). Has Bob Dole been working quietly behind the scenes to help Trump win the nomination, and then the election itself. I certainly can’t prove that he hasn’t, can you?

Also, is it just a mistake that the Dole/Kemp campaign website is still live? No really, it’s still there, check it out: http://www.dolekemp96.org/main.htm Why would he leave that up? Clearly he’s still bitter about losing.

Lastly, we all know the connection Bob Dole has to fruit, what with his stickers on bananas and pineapples all over the country. Wouldn’t it be his ultimate revenge to defeat Hillary by getting an actual orange elected president?

And while I’m not happy with their decision, it is theirs to make, and I will respect that. I know that for many, their reasons were upright and true. I honestly, truly, deeply hope they are right about their champion. I would very much like to be wrong about the damage that might be done. And I will be the first to admit it if that’s the case.

For right now, I’ve decided that I will remain calm, try very hard not to overreact, and wait and see what actually happens. Attempting to respond to what our new President has said is simply overwhelming, and ultimately of no consequence. I will wait and see what he does, what he is allowed to do, that is what matters, and then I will respond as events unfold. And I will hope for the best.

It may be wishful thinking, but I am hoping there are still enough good people of principle in the Republican party to keep his worst ideas at bay, and that there are still enough good people of principle in the Democratic party to help push forward his best ideas forward. It will be a time for leaders, on both sides, to stand up, be counted, and do what is right for the country. I hope they are up to it. To that end, this is what I am expecting…

Republicans…

Let me speak to you for a moment. You now have the Presidency, control of the House, control of the Senate, and are soon to have a majority of Supreme Court justices. In short, you have literally EVERYTHING YOU NEED to accomplish your goals. Everything! You have NO EXCUSES.

You say you can make America great? Do it! Make America great. Make America better than it is right now. Healthcare, jobs, unemployment, national debt, infrastructure, immigration, crime, guns, ISIS… Take your pick. Pick at least one of those, and make it better. Pick two if you can. You have full control. Keep your leader focused on the right things, and accomplish something meaningful for the American people. There is no excuse for failure. And we will be watching. And we will be keeping score. And we will hold you accountable. You have two years. If it goes well, we may even consider giving you full control for two more. Now GO!

Democrats…

Listen up Democrats. You have ONE job. Just one. Find someone who is less reprehensible than Hillary Clinton. That’s it. And that’s a really, really low bar, so it shouldn’t be all that hard. Find someone responsible, respectable, breathing, and if possible, who doesn’t use email. Someone who can step in should the Trump administration devolve into the shitstorm we all know it is capable of if left unsupervised. Seriously, have someone ready, no more screwing around. That is your ONLY job. You have four years to make it happen. Ready? GO!

Independents, Third Partiers, and Non-Voters…

Pay attention. Seriously, just look up once in a while. Nobody is real sure what’s going to happen next, but whatever it is, we are going to need your voice. So just, you know, be aware of your surroundings a bit.

There’s been a lot said lately about Hillary Clinton viciously attacking her husband’s accusers. I admit, I never really followed that closely the soap opera that was the Clinton marriage. Now that it’s come to the forefront again, I thought, in the interest in fairness (I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but I’ve been kinda harsh on Trump lately), I really ought to take a close look at this. I have to say, what I found was indeed shocking. I was truly surprised at the viciousness of these attacks. Let’s recap what I found. Join me, won’t you?

Monica Lewinsky

Might as well start at the top. The cigar-hiding intern who nearly brought down a presidency. What Bill (allegedly) did: He porked an intern. Certainly that raises some ethical questions, but to be fair, there is no indication that any of their, ahem, “interactions” were anything but consensual. What Hillary (allegedly) did: In a private (let’s say “locker room”) conversation, she called Monica, and I quote, a “narcissistic loony toon”.

Wow! I know. Talk about the mouth of a sailor. I’m sorry you had to hear language like that, but I wanted you to get the full impact of it. Certainly someone who talks like that has no business being president.

Paula Jones

Another big name on the Bill Clinton hit parade. What Bill (allegedly) did: Exposed himself and propositioned her. She turned him down. Perhaps if he’d had a Tic-Tac first, or bought her some furniture, or maybe just grabbed her by the… Well, we’ll never know.

Anywho, he was governor, she was a state employee, so she sued him for sexual harassment. Case was eventually dismissed before reaching trial. Paula’s legal team appealed. Bill settled, with the usual “no admission of guilt”. Paula got $850,000, most of which went to her lawyers.

What Hillary (allegedly) did: While there is no indication from anyone that Hillary did anything to attack Paula directly, according to Paula, Bill and/or Hillary “sent out people to dig up trash on me”.

It’s not clear whether this was before or after she appeared in Penthouse magazine (for the kids out there, that what we had for porn before the Internet), not that I’m judging. I also have no idea what was eventually “dug up”, but it had to be just awful, vicious stuff about her.

Kathleen Willey

Speaking of Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey was asked to testify in the Paula Jones case. What Bill (allegedly) did: He grabbed her by the…. Well, let’s just say, he put a move on her we’ll call the “Trump Handshake”. What Hillary (allegedly) did: Nothing.

But, her writer buddy, Sid Blumenthal (the real one, not the one quoted by Russian propagandists), had lunch with Kathleen’s writer buddy, Christopher Hitchens, where Chris mentioned a recent “60 Minutes” piece on the situation, to which Sid replied “Well she may look good today, she’s not going to look so good by Friday.” Sounds super menacing, right?

Of course, to the casual observer this sounds like nothing more than an observation on how quickly tides turn in the media. But we know better, don’t we. That was clearly a threat, straight from Hillary’s mouth. Well, not so much straight as by way of a guy named Sid, which is, of course, the most threatening way to deliver a threat. And we all know how threatening writers can be, what with that whole mighty pen sword fixation they have.

Gennifer Flowers

And the hit parade continues. What Bill (allegedly) did: Had a long term affair with her. By all accounts this was a consensual relationship. What Hillary (allegedly) did: Possibly hired a private investigator. Now that’s just a crazy, wacky, totally unhinged thing for a wife to do when she suspects her husband of cheating. I mean honestly, who does that?

Also, she called Gennifer a “failed cabaret singer who doesn’t have much of a resume”. Again, I must apologize for all this “locker room” talk. I would never use such language, were it not a direct quote, but it’s important you hear her exact words. Certainly we should never accept such crude and offensive language from a candidate for the highest office in the land.

Juanita Broaddrick

I’ve saved the best for last. This one is special, and for the first time, we see clear unmistakable signs of an actual attack by Hillary against one of Bill’s accusers. I know, I know, I made you wait, but trust me, it’s worth it.

What Bill (allegedly) did: He raped her. Or not. She did not report the attack to law enforcement, but she did report it to the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the New York Times. Skip ahead a few years, and she is called to testify in the Paul Jones case.

Now here’s where it gets weird. In a signed affidavit, under oath, she DENIES that Bill raped her. Later, when Kenneth Starr is investigating the Monica Lewinsky scandal, she denies the denial. So, did he or didn’t he? At this point, only Juanita knows for sure.

What Hillary (allegedly) did: Threatened her in an attempt to keep her quiet. Or not. In a 1999 interview she was asked if Bill, or anyone near Bill, ever threatened her or intimidated her to keep her quiet. Her answer? “no”.

But, and here’s where it gets really interesting, if we rewind to 1978, just after the attack allegedly happened, but before she went to the newspapers, she tells the story of the night Hillary threatened her.

Hillary approached Juanita at a fundraiser and said, and I quote, “I just want you to know how much Bill and I appreciate the things you do for him. Do you understand? Everything you do.”

Woah! Right? Did you hear that? I know that to the casual observer, that sounds like the normal kind of thing a candidate’s wife might say to literally anyone at a fundraising event. But you and I know, that’s some serious twisted “House of Cards” shit right there. Thanking her? For everything she did? Damn, that’s cold blooded!

So, not only does Hillary let Juanita know that she knows what’s going on, but she does it in such a way that if she didn’t know what’s going on, this Juanita chick would look like she’s batshit paranoid. Only Juanita’s not batshit paranoid, she would only be paranoid if Hillary didn’t know. But Hillary clearly knows, I mean why else would Hillary go so far out of the way to look like she didn’t know? Clever, right?

And, and, in the same move, Hillary doesn’t just let her know she’s on to her, Hillary in the same sentence threatens her with… with… well with… Thanks? Appreciation? Wait. Okay, I’m not sure what she threatened her with, but she threatened her with something. I mean, that’s clearly a threat. We all know Hillary threatened something, she had to, she’s Hillary after all. I mean, you see it too, right?

The Arizona Republic, founded in 1890, is the daily newspaper of Phoenix, and the largest newspaper in Arizona.

The Arizona Republic has never endorsed a Democrat for president. Ever. They did NOT endorse JFK, Woodrow Wilson, or FDR. (They REALLY didn’t like FDR.) For 120 years, they have exclusively endorsed only Republican candidates for president.

In short, the Arizona Republic is a conservative paper in a conservative state.

This year, for a number of reasons, they are not endorsing Donald Trump. I would like to invite you to take a close look at the carefully considered reasons for this break from their heritage…

On Temperament…

“The challenges the United States faces domestically and internationally demand a steady hand, a cool head and the ability to think carefully before acting. Hillary Clinton understands this. Donald Trump does not.”

“[Clinton] has withstood decades of scrutiny so intense it would wither most politicians. The vehemence of some of the anti-Clinton attacks strains credulity.Trump hasn’t even let the American people scrutinize his tax returns, which could help the nation judge his claims of business acumen.”

“Yet despite her flaws, Clinton is the superior choice. She does not casually say things that embolden our adversaries and frighten our allies. … Clinton retains her composure under pressure. She’s tough. She doesn’t back down.”

“Trump responds to criticism with the petulance of verbal spit wads. That’s beneath our national dignity. When the president of the United States speaks, the world expects substance. Not a blistering tweet.”

On Foreign Policy…

“[Clinton] is intimately familiar with the challenges we face in our relations with Russia, China, the Middle East, North Korea and elsewhere. She’ll stand by our friends and she’s not afraid to confront our enemies.”

“Arizona went down the hardline immigration road Trump travels. It led our state to SB 1070, the 2010 “show me your papers” law that earned Arizona international condemnation and did nothing to resolve real problems with undocumented immigration. Arizona understands that we don’t need a repeat of that divisive, unproductive fiasco on the national level. … We need a president who can broker solutions.”

On Human Rights…

“As secretary of state, Clinton made gender equality a priority for U.S. foreign policy. This is an extension of Clinton’s bold ‘women’s rights are human rights’ speech in 1995. It reflects an understanding that America’s commitment to human rights is a critically needed beacon in today’s troubled world.”

“Trump’s long history of objectifying women and his demeaning comments about women during the campaign are not just good-old-boy gaffes. They are evidence of deep character flaws. They are part of a pattern.”

“Many Republicans … shudder at the thought of Hillary Clinton naming Supreme Court justices. So they stick with Trump. We get that. But we ask them to see Trump for what he is — and what he is not. Trump’s conversion to conservatism is recent and unconvincing. There is no guarantee he will name solid conservatives to the Supreme Court.”

“Hillary Clinton has long been a centrist. Despite her tack left to woo Bernie Sanders supporters, Clinton retains her centrist roots. Her justices might not be in the mold of Antonin Scalia, but they will be accomplished individuals with the experience, education and intelligence to handle the job. They will be competent. Just as she is competent.”

On Trump’s Lack of Control

“Trump’s inability to control himself or be controlled by others represents a real threat to our national security. His recent efforts to stay on script are not reassuring. They are phony. The president commands our nuclear arsenal. Trump can’t command his own rhetoric.”

“Were he to become president, his casual remarks — such as saying he wouldn’t defend NATO partners from invasion — could have devastatingconsequences.” … Trump suggested Russia engage in espionage against Hillary Clinton — an outrageous statement that he later insisted was meant in jest. Trump said President Obama and Hillary Clinton were ‘co-founders’ of ISIS, then walked that back by saying it was sarcasm. It was reckless. Being the leader of the free world requires a sense of propriety that Trump lacks.”

On Trump’s Appeal…

“We understand that Trump’s candidacy tapped a deep discontent among those who feel left behind by a changed economy and shifting demographics. Their concerns deserve to be discussed with respect. Ironically, Trump hasn’t done that. He has merely pandered. Instead of offering solutions, he hangs scapegoats like piñatas and invites people to take a swing.”

“In a nation with an increasingly diverse population, Trump offers a recipe for permanent civil discord. In a global economy, he offers protectionism and a false promise to bring back jobs that no longer exist.”

“America needs to look ahead and build a new era of prosperity for the working class. This is Hillary Clinton’s opportunity. She can reach out to those who feel left behind. She can make it clear that America sees them and will address their concerns. She can move us beyond rancor and incivility.”

Conclusion

So for the first time, The Arizona Republic is endorsing a Democrat. For all the reasons above, they are endorsing Hillary Clinton. Those are just the highlights, you can read the entire endorsement here:

I know, it’s taboo, but…this year is the year that breaks all the rules. Any other year, if you asked, I might tell you who I liked or didn’t like. Any other year I might just as likely tell you it’s none of your goddamn business. And any other year I could not possibly care one whit who you were voting for. But, this year is different, so let’s talk about it.

I have always been registered as an Independent. I strongly lean Republican on economic and defense issues, but could never abide their desire to restrict personal freedom on social and religious issues. As a result I tend to vote Republican more often than not.

At the presidential level, I have only once not voted Republican, and that was to vote 3rd party (a deeply disappointing experience). This year would have been no different, I was prepared to hold my nose and vote for any of the other 17 Republican candidates, except one. Yes, even Ted Cruz, as repugnant as I find him, as any of those 17 were preferable to Hillary Clinton. Except one.

Additionally, I have never before publicly advocated for or endorsed any candidate. I would make general comments about any candidate, or more often about specific issues, but I was never one to publicly support any particular candidate. For any office. This year would have been no different, had the Republican party nominated any of their 17 candidates, except one.

But, that didn’t happen. This year IS different. It is fundamentally different. This year it is NOT about politics. It is about principle. It is about who we are as a people. It is about the survival of the Republic as we know it. I may be powerless to prevent it, but I will not knowingly be a part of the destruction of our society. I cannot and will not remain quiet about this. I can only apologize in advance if you’re tired of hearing it.

This year I will very likely do the unthinkable. I will very likely vote for Hillary Clinton, and I will urge others to consider doing the same. For the survival of the Republic. For the survival of our principles. For the survival of the American ideal. For the survival of who we are. And yes, I am fully prepared to accept the consequences if she wins.

If you cannot bring yourself to do the same, know that I while I understand, I beg you, I implore you, at least consider Gary Johnson. He really is the better choice, and a strong third party showing would do wonders for our political system, if anything is to remain of it after this year. Who knows, by November, I may even convince myself to join you.

Well, it’s nearly done. Unless there is an intervention by God Himself, or the Ghost of Reagan, it looks like Trump will be the Republican nominee. This means in about six months, one of the following will be elected as our new president:..

Option 1: Uncle Bernie. Bernie is like that crazy old uncle you see at holidays, he always saying the most ridiculous but lovable things. He’s so sweet and he means well, he just has no idea how anything really works. You just want to hug him. You really wish you could live in his world. And his ideas, they’re such nice thoughts, just so impractical. “They should give everybody free Twinkies on Tuesday. Twinkies for everybody, who’s with me. And puppies. Puppies for everybody. Nobody can be sad if they have a puppy.”

Option 2: The Wicked Witch of the West. That’s not really fair, there is a fundamental difference between Hillary and the Wicked Witch. The Wicked Witch of the West never gave a flying monkey what anyone else thought of her, and she certainly never changed her agenda to gain anyone’s approval. So… my apologies to Wicked Witch fans everywhere, she is clearly the more respected of the two.

Option 3: A giant talking oompa-loompa turd coated in a weird mixture of skin bronzer, dorito dust, and buffalo sauce, and possibly possessed by the ghost of Hitler.

It is a long ways to November, and I’m not gonna make it unless I scale back a bit. So for now, at least until I can’t stand it any longer, this is all I have to say about the presidential race…

In no particular order…

Hillary Clinton – is an opportunist. She is untrustworthy. She has an open marriage with the truth. She will say or do anything if she thinks it will get her votes. She has no real character and no real direction. Her only goal for becoming president is to become president. No one knows what she would do if president, but we could always hack her mail server to find out. But… She is a better choice than Trump.

Ted Cruz – is a mean little obstructionist wing-nut. He has alienated everyone in Congress. Even other Republicans don’t like him. He is more concerned with winning a political point than doing what is right for America. Despite claiming to be a Constitutional scholar, he would completely dismantle the 1st Amendment given the opportunity. He is everything that is wrong with modern American politics. But… He is a better choice than Trump.

Marco Rubio – is an ineffective first term junior Senator, completely beholden to his party establishment, and who religiously clings to the party line, even when it makes him look like an idiot. In other words, he is basically the Republican version of a Barack Obama. He is inexperienced, he is a lightweight, and he is in way over his head. But… He is a better choice than Trump.

Bernie Sanders – is a democratic socialist in the European tradition. He will increase government spending. He will increase taxes. He is convinced you will be better off for it. I am not convinced. Though he means well, many of his plans are naive at best, catastrophic at worst. But… He is a better choice than Trump.

Donald Trump – is a giant gasbag full of hate, nonsense, buffoonery, and bacon grease. He wants to make America great again by getting rid of all the Mexicans and Muslims, much like a certain German politician wanted to restore the Fatherland by getting rid of the Blacks and the Jews. He laughs at the handicapped. He enjoys watching his minions beat up protesters. He doesn’t realize Mexicans have developed a new anti-wall technology called “tunnels”. He could be the villain in an Austin Powers movie, but he would have to tone it down a bit. He is a better choice than Re-animated Zombie Hitler, but not by much.

America – there are only four viable non-Trump choices left – as distasteful as it is, we have to pick one of these four idiots to be our next president. At this point, I don’t even care which one, just pick one of them. I will go along with whoever you like. We can try again in four years, with a different set of idiots. But seriously… literally any candidate but Trump.